States and some organisations have expressed their views about the utility, purpose, scope and process of the legal review of weapons in various different contexts. Some of these views have been recorded domestic documents, such as military manuals on the law of armed conflict. Increasingly, however, States and organisations have articulated their positions in a range of international fora, either through written submissions or oral interventions.
This database compiles and organises publicly expressed views in relation to legal reviews, without prejudice to their relative significance or effect (for example, in terms of the development of customary international law). The database aims to comprehensively reflect the views of states but only covers the positions of a small number of selected organisations.
This database currently contains 379 positions and is continuously updated. Any corrections, or suggestions to add material, are welcome.
11 positions Japan (remove filter)
2024
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1. Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
Submission by Japan to the Secretary-General
6. Legal review (a) In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, it must, in accordance with the obligations of states under international law, be determined whether their use/employment is prohibited by international law in some or …
2023
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1. Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
Statement by Japan
Legal reviews of weapons systems using emerging technologies in the area of LAWS, which are carried out with reregard to their research, development, acquisition, employment, as well as methods and means of warfare, is useful in determining whether they are prohibited by international law applicable …
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1: Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
2022
Principles and Good Practices on Emerging Technologies in the Area of LAWS
VIII. Good Practices Related to Human-Machine Interaction […] 26. At various stages of the life-cycle of a weapon, the following good practices related to human-machine interaction can strengthen compliance with international humanitarian law, strengthen accountability, and mitigate risks in the use of weapons systems based …
2021
Building on Chile’s proposed four elements of further work
Weapons Reviews Relevant Guiding Principles: In accordance with States’ obligations under international law, in the study, development, acquisition, or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, determination must be made whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by …
Statement by Japan
In order to ensure that the military use of emerging technologies in the area of LAWS is in compliance with international legal obligations, particularly [IHL], we must carefully study the use in the entire life cycle of weapons systems. In particular, the hardware and software …
2020
National Commentary by Japan
This principle is considered stipulating substantially the same provision as that of Article 36 of the Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention on August 12, 1949. Article 36 can be interpreted as obligating each High Contracting Party, in its research, development, acquisition or adoption …
2019
Possible outcome of 2019 GGE and future actions of international community on LAWS
Concerning confidence building measures, it is appropriate to consider what kind of mechanism is suitable in order to secure transparency. Introducing an implementation mechanism of weapons review into the annual report of the CCW may work as one of such mechanisms.
2005
IHL and ERW: Response from Japan
14. Although Japan does not have a specific mechanism solely for the review described in the question, it considers it obvious that Japan should implement the obligation in Article 36 of the Protocol I and review the legality of new weapons.